Most deservedly so and you can do that here, though the censors at the Washington Post are getting damned picky about what they will post in the comments.
I keep posting. According to Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-CA) Trumpepstein may cause an "Epstein bomb" causing over 100 Republican members to "jailbreak" from Trump.
Daniel, it might be useful to rehearse who can initiate a disbarment proceding and before whom. I suspect the method varies with the jurisdiction, but the DC or Virginia bars might be good for examples.
It seems that so many of the outrages we're seeing are not much noised about nor responded to in any appropriate way.
We can only read transcripts of Trump's insane ramblings about water's effect on magnets at a few relatively underground sources, Daily Beast for example.
Are we going to continue to sleep throught the destruction of our democracy? I had suggested to WAPO that they run a daily column sharing transcripts of Trump's more astronishing ramblings or Truth Social posts that readers might better understand that the wheels are departing his wagon.
And yet they keep going on as if nothing is happening.
I absolutely love your expression, "the wheels are departing his wagon"! I am sitting across from my computer, laughing out loud at your wonderful imagery. Yes, wheels are departing, as the unbridled insanity continues.
What a wonderful idea, i.e., for WAPO, NYT, et.al. to publish trump's daily mumbles and ramblings! HCR is the only source I regularly see doing that now. If nothing else, reading them gives me a glimpse into such ridiculousness as to lighten my day by making me laugh out loud.
Heather Cox Richardson...she has a Substack ("Letters From an American"). A lot of people who subscribe to The Contrarian also subscribe to her Substack.
I'm a recent unpaying subscriber of hers. I'd like to support her, but I'm sort of at the end of my subscription rope. I have paid subscriptions to Paul Krugman, The Contrarians, NYT, WaPo, Star Tribune, The Atlantic, The American Prospect, NPR, Public Television, and probably forgot some.
I forget what the Prof. K subscription costs, something like $70/yr which is voluntary but you get more musings and I like to support things I think are worth something to me. But if he gets even 50k subscribers which I'd think is possible, that's $3.5M/yr in revenue. Not bad.
Expect no miracles or revelations from the Washington Post. Jeff Bezos is one of the contributors to the big ugly and needless ballroom. We can now figure out where he and his paper, headed by William Lewis (a Rupert Murdoch acolyte) stand.
Note: My subscription is up in two days. I'm not renewing, though they offered me a "carrot" of $30.00 to renew.
I canceled my WaPo subscription after Bezos refused to allow the editorial board to endorse Kamala Harris last year, which they had prepared for and expected to be able to do. Reports were that 250,000+ subscribers did the same for the same reason.
Didn't go by there much after that, but my subscription was still good until the end of whatever year I'd last paid for in advance. They offered me $29/year to come back for a while, but that's long gone.
In the meantime, Jennifer Rubin left there and she and Norm Eisen (an attorney? Not sure of his background) started The Contrarian here on Substack, and they have a number of writers in that stable now.
He not only reports, he brings suits challenging the legality of the various Trumpist depradations through his organization Defenders of Democracy. We think money contributed to his group, Public Citizen and ACLU may be a more effective investment right now than campaigns this early.
I'm still on the fence. My subscription is up in February. The commentary and editorial policy is undeserving but there is still some decent journalism. For $30/yr I guess that's worth something.
I'd rather add my support to Heather Cox Richardson, Robert Reich, Dan Rather (all on Substack) The Guardian, and yes, still NPR. With them and the BBC World Service, I think that I get a better picture.
I wrote another comment with a list of all the news subscriptions I have and it's something like 10. I'm sort of at the end of my rope. I can see dropping the WaPo and adding someone else, but it's getting out of hand.
Dana Milbank for me, but he got out of political commentary maybe for his own sanity. Eugene Robinson was a big loss for me. I haven't heard what he's up to.
I haven't noticed, but that doesn't mean you haven't picked up something. I also like George Will,but agree that he's an acquired taste. Or hopefully a tolerated taste.
Trump didn't nominate his collection of spineless sycophants without reason. He surrounded himself with a worthless collection of incompetents who will not tell him the truth - unless he *really* wants to hear it.
We live in the Hogan's Heroes version of a Nazi regime, because these Nazis are all pretty damned stupid. Unfortunately, compared to Trump's bunch, even Gestapo Major Wolfgang Hochstetter seems charming by comparison.
So funny. Do you think anyone in the cabinet is brave enough to tell Trump that we long ago stopped nuclear testing, in part, because there was no need to threaten our environment and existence. Technical and computer developments have long allowed us to test ever-advanced nuclear weaponry designs virtually without exploding a thing.
The word "peace" to him has a simple meaning: an award from the Nobel committee like the one they gave to Barack Obama. And if you've ever asked yourself about the rightness of that one, listen to Obama's acceptance speech. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AORo-YEXxNQ
The answer to that question is unfortunately quite obvious: there is no one in the cabinet brave enough to tell him what he needs to know but doesn't want to hear.
A friend of mine attended our Chicago No Kings protest day with a clever sign, that in 6 letters seemed to capture my exasperation with the truth of what you are saying. The letters read: GOP: WTF (Naive soul that I am, it took me a while to figure out what "WTF" could stand for. But, once I did, I burst out laughing.)
It seems to me that after we get done rethinking the entire Executive Branch from a Constitutional viewpoint, we need to rethink the courts so a judgement of Vengeful Prosecution is an automatic disbarment for the prosecutor involved. tRump needs to be labeled a vexatious litigant and slapped with many new roadblocks in his path to his maelstrom of litigation. Edit: changed on to of.
I would add that if Congress failed to pass a budget before September 30th, they would receive no pay and permanently banned from running for federal office in the future.
It was once assumed that people with honor,morals, integrity and ethics would be in these positions in government so not enough actual safeguards were put in place at the time the Constitution was written. Times have changed, and we need to codify and enforce new rules.
"It was once assumed that people with honor,morals, integrity and ethics would be in these positions in government..."
Agreed. It was also once assumed that the voters would have honor, morals, integrity and ethics when choosing among the candidates. The mess that is government at all levels in on us.
How could we as voters assess a candidate's honor, morals, integrity and ethics? Almost nobody I would think has the time and money to thoroughly investigate all the candidates.
The rethuglicans have parsed the Constitution for all the breach points. I have come to believe that nothing short of a new Constitution or a national divorce will do. The whole concept of Project 2025 is about quashing and subjugating the Americans they despise. I don’t want to be subjugated. I don’t think even after the tRump recession they will want to share a nation with the likes of me and my ilk. Therein may lie a path through to separate Blue States and Red States of America.
"I have come to believe that nothing short of a new Constitution or a national divorce will do."
I think we've done pretty well with the Constitution we have. A "new Constitution or a national divorce" is certainly not needed.
"The whole concept of Project 2025 is about quashing and subjugating the Americans they despise."
And how, exactly, do you think you're being "quashed" or "subjugated"?
"I don’t think even after the tRump recession they will want to share a nation with the likes of me and my ilk."
A recession is certainly a possibility if Trump doesn't get his head out of his butt in regard to tariffs. Hopefully, SCOTUS will finally weigh in and declare that the power to tariff resides solely with Congress. As for "you and your ilk" (whatever that means), most people, left to their own devices, tend to treat each other with respect. I believe organizations, to include political parties, would rather keep us at each other's throats and divided while they maintain control.
"Therein may lie a path through to separate Blue States and Red States of America."
Seeing our country through the lens of partisan politics is part of the problem.
"tRump needs to be labeled a vexatious litigant and slapped with many new roadblocks in his path to his maelstrom of litigation."
Of course. Perhaps those same standards should also be applied to those who file a "maelstrom of litigation" against Trump for anything he says or does (that would include Norm Eisen).
Thanks, Stephen! (Big smile). It's all too easy to be too serious and brooding nowadays. This "community" is a safe place. If anyone gets persistently unpleasant, we can have recourse to one of the three dots in the top right hand corner...
In my years of practicing law, I occasionally was faced with a case which was so frivolous that it was hard to find the right words to expose its legal insufficiency with the right degree of dignified scorn. After all, simply to restate the charges gave them undeserved credibility. Your item is a model for brief-writing in support of a motion to dismiss bad faith litigation.
Rule 11 and Rule 9(b)! Long may they prevail! Let's hope that the judge in the case where the sentencing brief was withdrawn for accurately describing Jan 6 takes the opportunity to ream out Pirro and her bosses.
But Gym Jordan and James Comer will Never, Never, see "Weaponization of the DOJ" provided it is done in service to MAGA fictions. Embarrassment of this whole DOJ farce should be running rampant in the halls of Congress. But.... alas.
What a pair! It appears to me that neither of them will ever do something that actually benefits the United States. They are not worth the powder to blow them to hell.
Recently Kat Abughazaleh, a progressive Democratic candidate for Congress in Illinois, was indicted for taking part in an anti-ICE protest. Under this president, DOJ prosecutions have become vindictive, cruel, political. Illegal. Are there any DOJ prosecutions that are aimed at actual crimes?
Presumably many of the bad-faith cases will eventually be dismissed. In the meantime, defendants incur huge legal bills, the cost of their time, emotional drain and pain for them and their families. Why aren't these cases dismissed expeditiously and with prejudice, with legal fees awarded to defendants, and with the most serious legal sanctions on attorneys filing these cases?
This is the only point worth making on these frivilous cases. Spending huge amounts of time and effort only dilutes the time and effort to combat real affronts to our democracy. Trump is creating a formidable military force purportably to apply immigration laws. He will certainly misuse them to combat the vote come next November.
Yes. In case his masters haven't ensured the rigging of enough state elections, they've made sure their puppet has readied militia and military forces to be in the streets.
Lawyers who follow Trump’s orders blindly should be disbarred. Trump is not their client, and lying about the basis of a court filing (for a client or for anyone else) violates every code of conduct in the country. We can’t stop toadies like Halligan from acting unethically, but we can force them to choose between a short-term office holder and their careers. Halligan chose…. poorly.
Just....so....tired. Hate his name. Hate his face. Hate his idiocy. Hate that he is getting away with all the things we would all be in prison for the rest of our lives for. So....tired.
I work for a wealthy couple twice a month. Often when i arrive faux is on. On my flight home last week lady next to me had faux on. I swear- why is on ALL the time?? (I have my earbuds on but can often read a cryon…it’s awful)
And all of the legitimate media refuse to actually cover what is coming out of Fox News. Yes, they occasionally refer to Fox disparagingly, but they don't cover the disinformation that flows out like sewage every single day and night. We need to hear and see, all the time, such coverage as, "And the Fox News information machine has broadcast the following to its viewers..." And fact check them relentlessly. "Hannity has said tonight...," It will be quite a job, I agree, but one well worth doing. I am convinced that very few people appreciate how Fox does its job, just as I know that very few people appreciate how much, and how many, minds are affected by the poison it spews into the air waves. Think of it this way: if we could make an obnoxious noise over every sentence spoken in a Hannity segment that contained false information, how many would hear it? I think it might be able to be heard on the moon! Many thousands died during Covid because of Fox News. Views of Biden tripping on stairs or falling from his bike were seen billions of times by Fox viewers. How many of them have seen Trump fall?
An example that people rarely leave their "bubble". The only way to pierce this info bubble is by billboards. When one is stuck in traffic one might read what is there. It is hard to change the channel.
Thank you for your input. I understand what you’re saying. My point is that if you only watch faux news you may only be seeing one side. I will look into the Free Press on Substack.
"Often when i arrive faux is on. On my flight home last week lady next to me had faux on...(I have my earbuds on but can often read a cryon…it’s awful)"
And your point is what, exactly? Not everyone thinks like you...or me, and that is a good thing. Do you believe your preferred sources for news and opinion are superior, non-biased, and cover all aspects of any particular story? What are your standards for determining that?
If you could watch all the cable news outlets on any given day, you'd find that they either cover different topics or have different views on the very same topic. The point is that if you consume all your news from outlets that adhere to the same ideology, you're not getting the whole picture.
Ratings-wise, Fox wins hands down overall and in most time slots. Is it "fair and balanced"? Not any more than CNN, MSNBC or the legacy media, and those outlets are clearly left-leaning. But media outlets are not required to be "fair and balanced" nor should they be.
Two outlets that do better with more wide-ranging views are The Free Press on Substack and NewsNation on cable. How many posters in this forum do you think read or watch either one?
“We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility.”
Do we need a stronger sign of the level of his dementia that he somehow still believes he has a positive reputation and credibility? It's been obvious for many years that he has the maturity and self control of a toddler. He's also delusional to a level that is hard to fathom. He's partly the victim of the industrial strength echo chamber he's built around himself as well as the puppet of his advisors/manipulators.
He really is the only check on his own megalomania. When the people around him fear he's gone too far they jump into damage control...defending him, explaining what he actually meant or claiming he was joking then he makes a statement to the media that completely contradicts the claims of his spokesmen.
Johnson recently defended the ballroom by claiming that Democrats "attack everything he does." Sure that could mean that Dems are unfairly intolerant...OR it could mean that nearly everything he does is abhorrent and moronic.
After his rampage of stupidity, I guess the midterms will tell us if he still can shoot someone in the middle of 5th Avenue with no repercussions. God help us.
The nationwide elections apparatus must be protected from the likes of Musk and the tech bros, and foreign espionage.
If hackers can cause shutdowns and data breaches to banks, hospitals, local governments, colleges, credit bureaus, insurance exchanges, etc., what would lead one to think that they can't access election systems? Elections software is updated via computers connected, if only briefly, to the web, or flash drives, that are easily corrupted.
And now Dominion Voting Systems, used in many states, has been bought by a Republican election denier. He will control the hardware and software.
They are counting on Democrats to have a knee-jerk aversion to the concept of election hacking because Trump falsely accused Democrats of doing it. But the bottom line is that it can be done.
Remember above all else: every Trump accusation ("Democrats stole the election") amounts to an admission.
Let's also think about what the DOJ is NOT doing while it's wasting time on these vindictive prosecutions and allowing corruption to become the order of the day.
This would be more fodder for an eventual impeachment of Trump, Bondi and Halligan, except that Republicans will do anything to let Trump off the hook.
Trump's own words will likely throw these cases out of court, if there is any justice left. What a travesty that personal vengeance holds such sway!!
Investigate Halligan's appointment. What promises did she give Trump?
I think they all must promise to love, flatter and obey the monster.
'Love, flatter and obey' sound more like a wonky wedding vow than an oath of office.
You'll have to ask Ivana, Marla, and Melania about that. Although the first word was more likely a physical act, since he has no idea what love is.
"Oath of office? We don't need no stinkin' oaths of office from my appointees!"
Oath to the oaf.
Most deservedly so and you can do that here, though the censors at the Washington Post are getting damned picky about what they will post in the comments.
The comments were what I used to take notice of in the WaPo. I'm certainly not encouraged to renew my subscription,.
The AP website is worse, I used the word "liar" as a descriptive and the comment was instantaneously removed.
Indeed.
I keep posting. According to Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-CA) Trumpepstein may cause an "Epstein bomb" causing over 100 Republican members to "jailbreak" from Trump.
Massive Congressional visits November 18.
https://www.instagram.com/flare.usa/p/DP_mdOyjdiG/
Visit Congressional Republicans.https://www.mobilize.us/indivisible/event/851451/
I continue to be exasperated by the parties and lawyers with cases when justices and judges who have dispositive records of bribery and prejudice are not challenged. At SCOTUS, Roberts opened the door in November, 2023. https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/Code-of-Conduct-for-Justices_November_13_2023.pdf
https://blueprint.democrats.org/
Daniel, it might be useful to rehearse who can initiate a disbarment proceding and before whom. I suspect the method varies with the jurisdiction, but the DC or Virginia bars might be good for examples.
It seems that so many of the outrages we're seeing are not much noised about nor responded to in any appropriate way.
We can only read transcripts of Trump's insane ramblings about water's effect on magnets at a few relatively underground sources, Daily Beast for example.
Are we going to continue to sleep throught the destruction of our democracy? I had suggested to WAPO that they run a daily column sharing transcripts of Trump's more astronishing ramblings or Truth Social posts that readers might better understand that the wheels are departing his wagon.
And yet they keep going on as if nothing is happening.
akkkkkk!
I absolutely love your expression, "the wheels are departing his wagon"! I am sitting across from my computer, laughing out loud at your wonderful imagery. Yes, wheels are departing, as the unbridled insanity continues.
Me, too!! What a wordsmith! 🤣
Thanks! It is all craziness. Might as well laugh when we can.
What a wonderful idea, i.e., for WAPO, NYT, et.al. to publish trump's daily mumbles and ramblings! HCR is the only source I regularly see doing that now. If nothing else, reading them gives me a glimpse into such ridiculousness as to lighten my day by making me laugh out loud.
HCR?
Heather Cox Richardson...she has a Substack ("Letters From an American"). A lot of people who subscribe to The Contrarian also subscribe to her Substack.
Thank you. Just subscribed.
So many initialisms, head spinning.
I'm a recent unpaying subscriber of hers. I'd like to support her, but I'm sort of at the end of my subscription rope. I have paid subscriptions to Paul Krugman, The Contrarians, NYT, WaPo, Star Tribune, The Atlantic, The American Prospect, NPR, Public Television, and probably forgot some.
I forget what the Prof. K subscription costs, something like $70/yr which is voluntary but you get more musings and I like to support things I think are worth something to me. But if he gets even 50k subscribers which I'd think is possible, that's $3.5M/yr in revenue. Not bad.
My every morning first read.
Oh yes. Verbatim. Unfinished sentences and all.
Expect no miracles or revelations from the Washington Post. Jeff Bezos is one of the contributors to the big ugly and needless ballroom. We can now figure out where he and his paper, headed by William Lewis (a Rupert Murdoch acolyte) stand.
Note: My subscription is up in two days. I'm not renewing, though they offered me a "carrot" of $30.00 to renew.
I canceled my WaPo subscription after Bezos refused to allow the editorial board to endorse Kamala Harris last year, which they had prepared for and expected to be able to do. Reports were that 250,000+ subscribers did the same for the same reason.
Didn't go by there much after that, but my subscription was still good until the end of whatever year I'd last paid for in advance. They offered me $29/year to come back for a while, but that's long gone.
In the meantime, Jennifer Rubin left there and she and Norm Eisen (an attorney? Not sure of his background) started The Contrarian here on Substack, and they have a number of writers in that stable now.
Yes, Norm Eisen is a practicing attorney. He periodically reports on legal challenges that he is involved in for the benefit of the people.
That's where our subscriptions go - Norm's and others' constant legal activities in the cause.
Thanks. I had been reading Rubin at WaPo for a long time, so I was familiar with her work.
He not only reports, he brings suits challenging the legality of the various Trumpist depradations through his organization Defenders of Democracy. We think money contributed to his group, Public Citizen and ACLU may be a more effective investment right now than campaigns this early.
Brace yourself for lots of carrots. "Delete" is quick, easy, and free.
I'm still on the fence. My subscription is up in February. The commentary and editorial policy is undeserving but there is still some decent journalism. For $30/yr I guess that's worth something.
I'd rather add my support to Heather Cox Richardson, Robert Reich, Dan Rather (all on Substack) The Guardian, and yes, still NPR. With them and the BBC World Service, I think that I get a better picture.
I wrote another comment with a list of all the news subscriptions I have and it's something like 10. I'm sort of at the end of my rope. I can see dropping the WaPo and adding someone else, but it's getting out of hand.
When David Ignatious leaves, then I will too.
Dana Milbank for me, but he got out of political commentary maybe for his own sanity. Eugene Robinson was a big loss for me. I haven't heard what he's up to.
Have you noted that his contributions have been fewer and farther between lately?
I haven't noticed, but that doesn't mean you haven't picked up something. I also like George Will,but agree that he's an acquired taste. Or hopefully a tolerated taste.
Don't depend on The Washington Post for investigative rigor, or even basic honesty.
Jennifer Rubin quit WaPo for a very good reason.
And for as long as they do that, I won't be buying.
"And yet they keep going on as if nothing is happening."
Are you really expecting WAPO's owner and trump ally Bezos to do something?
yes
Trump didn't nominate his collection of spineless sycophants without reason. He surrounded himself with a worthless collection of incompetents who will not tell him the truth - unless he *really* wants to hear it.
Truth is a nebulous commodity in an alternate universe.
Well put! I will have to add to my description of "reality".
We live in a Nazi regime, and it'll get worse unless the judiciary protects us against the monster-in-chief.
We live in the Hogan's Heroes version of a Nazi regime, because these Nazis are all pretty damned stupid. Unfortunately, compared to Trump's bunch, even Gestapo Major Wolfgang Hochstetter seems charming by comparison.
So funny. Do you think anyone in the cabinet is brave enough to tell Trump that we long ago stopped nuclear testing, in part, because there was no need to threaten our environment and existence. Technical and computer developments have long allowed us to test ever-advanced nuclear weaponry designs virtually without exploding a thing.
There was also a treaty that allowed for nothing but underground testing, signed in 1963. Trump's threat to renew testing doesn' foment peace.
The word "peace" to him has a simple meaning: an award from the Nobel committee like the one they gave to Barack Obama. And if you've ever asked yourself about the rightness of that one, listen to Obama's acceptance speech. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AORo-YEXxNQ
The answer to that question is unfortunately quite obvious: there is no one in the cabinet brave enough to tell him what he needs to know but doesn't want to hear.
A friend of mine attended our Chicago No Kings protest day with a clever sign, that in 6 letters seemed to capture my exasperation with the truth of what you are saying. The letters read: GOP: WTF (Naive soul that I am, it took me a while to figure out what "WTF" could stand for. But, once I did, I burst out laughing.)
Most of the lower judiciary DOES protect us, just not the McConnell/Roberts INFERIOR court.
True, but they have no enforcement powers.
It seems to me that after we get done rethinking the entire Executive Branch from a Constitutional viewpoint, we need to rethink the courts so a judgement of Vengeful Prosecution is an automatic disbarment for the prosecutor involved. tRump needs to be labeled a vexatious litigant and slapped with many new roadblocks in his path to his maelstrom of litigation. Edit: changed on to of.
And.... the Supreme Court, for it ever to shake its partisan cloak, must adopt term limits, age limits, and an ethics code with teeth.
That would require a constitutional amendment. And if you truly want to go down that road, let's apply those same rules to members of Congress.
And add a provision that if they do not go to work they take at least a cut in pay.
I would add that if Congress failed to pass a budget before September 30th, they would receive no pay and permanently banned from running for federal office in the future.
Maybe that would motivate them to tend to their first responsibility.
Yes
It was once assumed that people with honor,morals, integrity and ethics would be in these positions in government so not enough actual safeguards were put in place at the time the Constitution was written. Times have changed, and we need to codify and enforce new rules.
Maybe candidates should have to pass a test on how US government works! Even if they failed the test, they would’ve learned something maybe.
"It was once assumed that people with honor,morals, integrity and ethics would be in these positions in government..."
Agreed. It was also once assumed that the voters would have honor, morals, integrity and ethics when choosing among the candidates. The mess that is government at all levels in on us.
How could we as voters assess a candidate's honor, morals, integrity and ethics? Almost nobody I would think has the time and money to thoroughly investigate all the candidates.
The rethuglicans have parsed the Constitution for all the breach points. I have come to believe that nothing short of a new Constitution or a national divorce will do. The whole concept of Project 2025 is about quashing and subjugating the Americans they despise. I don’t want to be subjugated. I don’t think even after the tRump recession they will want to share a nation with the likes of me and my ilk. Therein may lie a path through to separate Blue States and Red States of America.
"I have come to believe that nothing short of a new Constitution or a national divorce will do."
I think we've done pretty well with the Constitution we have. A "new Constitution or a national divorce" is certainly not needed.
"The whole concept of Project 2025 is about quashing and subjugating the Americans they despise."
And how, exactly, do you think you're being "quashed" or "subjugated"?
"I don’t think even after the tRump recession they will want to share a nation with the likes of me and my ilk."
A recession is certainly a possibility if Trump doesn't get his head out of his butt in regard to tariffs. Hopefully, SCOTUS will finally weigh in and declare that the power to tariff resides solely with Congress. As for "you and your ilk" (whatever that means), most people, left to their own devices, tend to treat each other with respect. I believe organizations, to include political parties, would rather keep us at each other's throats and divided while they maintain control.
"Therein may lie a path through to separate Blue States and Red States of America."
Seeing our country through the lens of partisan politics is part of the problem.
"tRump needs to be labeled a vexatious litigant and slapped with many new roadblocks in his path to his maelstrom of litigation."
Of course. Perhaps those same standards should also be applied to those who file a "maelstrom of litigation" against Trump for anything he says or does (that would include Norm Eisen).
Gee, I'm relieved you made that edit. :)
If it was just a typo, which I suspect this was, I don't explain, but if I alter meaning, then I state the reason.
I should just stop making jokes.
You keep on making jokes! I’ve been too serious and brooding lately!
Thanks, Stephen! (Big smile). It's all too easy to be too serious and brooding nowadays. This "community" is a safe place. If anyone gets persistently unpleasant, we can have recourse to one of the three dots in the top right hand corner...
In my years of practicing law, I occasionally was faced with a case which was so frivolous that it was hard to find the right words to expose its legal insufficiency with the right degree of dignified scorn. After all, simply to restate the charges gave them undeserved credibility. Your item is a model for brief-writing in support of a motion to dismiss bad faith litigation.
I would've been Rule 11ed so quickly that I wouldn't have been able to practice anymore. But I'm not tRump's handpicked, unethical goon.
Rule 11.
Rule 11 and Rule 9(b)! Long may they prevail! Let's hope that the judge in the case where the sentencing brief was withdrawn for accurately describing Jan 6 takes the opportunity to ream out Pirro and her bosses.
But Gym Jordan and James Comer will Never, Never, see "Weaponization of the DOJ" provided it is done in service to MAGA fictions. Embarrassment of this whole DOJ farce should be running rampant in the halls of Congress. But.... alas.
Adding Senate Judiciary Chairman Grassley to the list!
For sure. Hope he retires. He's way past his "Use By" date
You'd think by now gra$$ley, my senator, would have salted enough away but no, he's there for the MAGA More
What a pair! It appears to me that neither of them will ever do something that actually benefits the United States. They are not worth the powder to blow them to hell.
Recently Kat Abughazaleh, a progressive Democratic candidate for Congress in Illinois, was indicted for taking part in an anti-ICE protest. Under this president, DOJ prosecutions have become vindictive, cruel, political. Illegal. Are there any DOJ prosecutions that are aimed at actual crimes?
I think there was one recently, but the prosecutors got fired for referring to the convicted felon as an insurrectionist.
Presumably many of the bad-faith cases will eventually be dismissed. In the meantime, defendants incur huge legal bills, the cost of their time, emotional drain and pain for them and their families. Why aren't these cases dismissed expeditiously and with prejudice, with legal fees awarded to defendants, and with the most serious legal sanctions on attorneys filing these cases?
This is the only point worth making on these frivilous cases. Spending huge amounts of time and effort only dilutes the time and effort to combat real affronts to our democracy. Trump is creating a formidable military force purportably to apply immigration laws. He will certainly misuse them to combat the vote come next November.
Yes. In case his masters haven't ensured the rigging of enough state elections, they've made sure their puppet has readied militia and military forces to be in the streets.
Even the judges are overwhelmed
Lawyers who follow Trump’s orders blindly should be disbarred. Trump is not their client, and lying about the basis of a court filing (for a client or for anyone else) violates every code of conduct in the country. We can’t stop toadies like Halligan from acting unethically, but we can force them to choose between a short-term office holder and their careers. Halligan chose…. poorly.
After all of this, remember the Epstein files! We have to start somewhere …. and this might be the place/spot/time.
Just....so....tired. Hate his name. Hate his face. Hate his idiocy. Hate that he is getting away with all the things we would all be in prison for the rest of our lives for. So....tired.
The sound of his voice alone is enough to hate, as well as the content delivered.
I work for a wealthy couple twice a month. Often when i arrive faux is on. On my flight home last week lady next to me had faux on. I swear- why is on ALL the time?? (I have my earbuds on but can often read a cryon…it’s awful)
And all of the legitimate media refuse to actually cover what is coming out of Fox News. Yes, they occasionally refer to Fox disparagingly, but they don't cover the disinformation that flows out like sewage every single day and night. We need to hear and see, all the time, such coverage as, "And the Fox News information machine has broadcast the following to its viewers..." And fact check them relentlessly. "Hannity has said tonight...," It will be quite a job, I agree, but one well worth doing. I am convinced that very few people appreciate how Fox does its job, just as I know that very few people appreciate how much, and how many, minds are affected by the poison it spews into the air waves. Think of it this way: if we could make an obnoxious noise over every sentence spoken in a Hannity segment that contained false information, how many would hear it? I think it might be able to be heard on the moon! Many thousands died during Covid because of Fox News. Views of Biden tripping on stairs or falling from his bike were seen billions of times by Fox viewers. How many of them have seen Trump fall?
An example that people rarely leave their "bubble". The only way to pierce this info bubble is by billboards. When one is stuck in traffic one might read what is there. It is hard to change the channel.
Thank you for your input. I understand what you’re saying. My point is that if you only watch faux news you may only be seeing one side. I will look into the Free Press on Substack.
For a lighter view of this:
"8 Ways To Tell If Your News Program Is Biased"
https://babylonbee.com/news/8-ways-to-tell-if-your-news-program-is-biased
"Often when i arrive faux is on. On my flight home last week lady next to me had faux on...(I have my earbuds on but can often read a cryon…it’s awful)"
And your point is what, exactly? Not everyone thinks like you...or me, and that is a good thing. Do you believe your preferred sources for news and opinion are superior, non-biased, and cover all aspects of any particular story? What are your standards for determining that?
If you could watch all the cable news outlets on any given day, you'd find that they either cover different topics or have different views on the very same topic. The point is that if you consume all your news from outlets that adhere to the same ideology, you're not getting the whole picture.
Ratings-wise, Fox wins hands down overall and in most time slots. Is it "fair and balanced"? Not any more than CNN, MSNBC or the legacy media, and those outlets are clearly left-leaning. But media outlets are not required to be "fair and balanced" nor should they be.
"Milton Friedman - Freedom vs. Fairness"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_7fu2lNNB8
Two outlets that do better with more wide-ranging views are The Free Press on Substack and NewsNation on cable. How many posters in this forum do you think read or watch either one?
“We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility.”
Do we need a stronger sign of the level of his dementia that he somehow still believes he has a positive reputation and credibility? It's been obvious for many years that he has the maturity and self control of a toddler. He's also delusional to a level that is hard to fathom. He's partly the victim of the industrial strength echo chamber he's built around himself as well as the puppet of his advisors/manipulators.
He really is the only check on his own megalomania. When the people around him fear he's gone too far they jump into damage control...defending him, explaining what he actually meant or claiming he was joking then he makes a statement to the media that completely contradicts the claims of his spokesmen.
Johnson recently defended the ballroom by claiming that Democrats "attack everything he does." Sure that could mean that Dems are unfairly intolerant...OR it could mean that nearly everything he does is abhorrent and moronic.
After his rampage of stupidity, I guess the midterms will tell us if he still can shoot someone in the middle of 5th Avenue with no repercussions. God help us.
The nationwide elections apparatus must be protected from the likes of Musk and the tech bros, and foreign espionage.
If hackers can cause shutdowns and data breaches to banks, hospitals, local governments, colleges, credit bureaus, insurance exchanges, etc., what would lead one to think that they can't access election systems? Elections software is updated via computers connected, if only briefly, to the web, or flash drives, that are easily corrupted.
And now Dominion Voting Systems, used in many states, has been bought by a Republican election denier. He will control the hardware and software.
They are counting on Democrats to have a knee-jerk aversion to the concept of election hacking because Trump falsely accused Democrats of doing it. But the bottom line is that it can be done.
Remember above all else: every Trump accusation ("Democrats stole the election") amounts to an admission.
Let's also think about what the DOJ is NOT doing while it's wasting time on these vindictive prosecutions and allowing corruption to become the order of the day.
These Republicans prosecutors should be charged with melicious prosecution and be investigated by the Bar Association.
Trump is corruption personified, equivalent to childish notion of King Herod from religious instruction class.
This would be more fodder for an eventual impeachment of Trump, Bondi and Halligan, except that Republicans will do anything to let Trump off the hook.